Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Gabriel v. Summers

June 7, 2007

WILLIAM B. GABRIEL PLAINTIFF
v.
WILLIAM N. SUMMERS, STEPHEN F. DANIELS, NORTH BLUFFS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, AND DOES 1-100 DEFENDANTS



The opinion of the court was delivered by: James M. Moody United States District Judge

ORDER

Pending are Plaintiff's motion for injunctive relief, docket # 55 and "notice of appeal of rulings" dated May 4 and 7, 2007 which the Court will construe as a motion for reconsideration, docket # 72. On May 4, 2007 the Court entered an order returning to Plaintiff certain "evidentiary packets" that the Plaintiff had filed with the Court independent of a substantive motion. Plaintiff mistakenly believed that all exhibits and initial disclosures should be filed with the Court. The Court's guidelines for filing discovery documents clearly prohibit such filings. Accordingly, the Court denies Plaintiff's motion to reconsider its Order dated May 4, 2007.

On May 7, 2007 the Court entered an Order dismissing Separate Defendant North Bluffs Development Corporation finding that the Court did not have diversity jurisdiction and the Plaintiff had failed to state a claim for civil rights or RICO violations against this defendant.

The Court has reviewed the record again in light of Plaintiff's motion and finds that Plaintiff has not stated facts which demonstrate a federal claim against this Defendant. Plaintiff has offered no evidence which would demonstrate a racketeering activity or a pattern of such activity as required to state a RICO cause of action. See United Healthcare Corp. v. Am. Trade Ins. Co., 88 F.3d 563 (8th Cir. 1996) (setting forth the elements of RICO claims). Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration is denied.

Plaintiff's motion for injunctive relief seeks injunctive relief against the City of North Little Rock. The City of North Little Rock is not a party to this action. Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 7th day of June, 2007.

20070607

© 1992-2007 VersusLaw ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.